Supreme Court

R. v. Hansen, 2005 NWTSC 65
Date: 20050729
Docket: S-1-CR-2004000076

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

IN THE MATTER OF:


HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN


- and -


JEREMY RYAN HANSEN


Transcript of the Oral Reasons for Sentence by the Honourable Justice J.E. Richard, sitting at Inuvik, in the Northwest Territories, on July 19th, A.D. 2005.


APPEARANCES:

Mr. B. Lepage:   Counsel for the Crown

Mr. J. MacFarlane:  Counsel for the Accused


(Charge under s. 5(4) CDSA)


THE COURT: Jeremy Ryan Hansen now pleads guilty to trafficking in marijuana contrary to section 5(4) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. His crime consists of participation in the transport of a quantity of marijuana from Edmonton, Alberta to Inuvik for purposes of resale here in Inuvik and in the Delta region in September, 2003.

The RCMP in Inuvik acted on a tip and were able to seize the marijuana shortly after its arrival in Inuvik. This offender, Jeremy Hansen, was arrested. He gave a voluntary statement to the police in which he admitted that he agreed to receive the marijuana and to sell it in order to make money. He was hoping to make 1,000 to $5,000, which he said he intended to put into a special savings account for his young son.

In his statement to police he said he expected that the unnamed supplier down south would send him one or two pounds of marijuana and that he was to pay a local drug dealer, Norman Walper, for it. What was shipped to him, however, was close to eight pounds of marijuana, or just under three kilograms. In September, 2003 that amount of marijuana would have a value at the dealer's level of approximately $28,000 here in Inuvik.

[Page 1]

I am satisfied from my review of the voir dire evidence earlier this year that Jeremy Hansen was, indeed, taken in or taken advantage of by Norman Walper and/or others on the issue of the amount of marijuana they were going to transport into Inuvik with Jeremy Hansen's involvement and participation. One of the lessons that I am sure Jeremy Hansen has learned from this experience is that you cannot trust anyone in the drug business.

But Jeremy Hansen was no innocent dupe. Just as the other drug dealers took advantage of him, he himself took advantage of his employer, Northwest Transport, and his boss, Robin McConville, by using his employer's business and his employment benefits of free freight privileges to bring what he knew to be illicit marijuana into Inuvik in a company truck with his boss's permission.

He admitted to the police that he used to sell joints when he was in high school and he did that then in order to have access to marijuana for his own use, but he said he stopped selling in high school when his mother told him the police were on to him and he got scared. But in September, 2003 he was given the opportunity to get involved in larger transactions which would

[Page 2]

see him make profits of up to $5,000, and he thought about it, he said, and he thought about it and he decided to do it, knowing the risks. As he said to the police, “You can't get anywhere without taking chances.” So Jeremy Hansen took his chances and now he has had this serious charge hanging over his head for about two years and now today he has to pay the price.

This young man has no criminal record. He is of Inuvialuit descent, born and raised here in Inuvik, 20 years old at the time of committing this offence in September, '03. He is a high school graduate and has maintained steady employment since leaving high school. He is married with a young child, owns his own home, makes the mortgage payments.

His family and his in-laws, I am told, are supportive of him. His present employer and even his previous employer, Mr. McConville, whom he took advantage of, speak positively of him and of his work ethic. Upon his arrest, he was cooperative with the police and readily accepted responsibility for his role in this crime and stated that he was prepared to accept the consequences, including jail time.

He exercised his right to a Preliminary Inquiry and he also exercised his right to

[Page 3]

challenge the validity of the RCMP seizure of the drugs and to challenge the admissibility of his statement to police. When these rulings went against him, he then indicated his intention to plead guilty.

It cannot be said that his guilty plea yesterday is an early guilty plea or a guilty plea at the first opportunity, coming, as it does, some 22 months after he was charged. But I am satisfied that his apology to his family, to Mr. McConville, to the community and to the Court is genuine and that he is sincere in his acknowledgement of his own wrongdoing, of his taking responsibility for making a wrong decision. I have the clear sense that we will not see Mr. Jeremy Hansen in court again in the future.

The maximum sentence for this crime is five years' imprisonment.

There are two aggravating features or circumstances. Firstly, there is the large amount of marijuana that was transported (and therefore trafficked) with his direct involvement. Secondly, there is the fact that in committing the crime he took advantage of his employer, in particular Mr. McConville, and got his employer involved or implicated in this

[Page 4]

illegal scheme.

There are strong mitigating factors that must act to soften the sentence to be imposed. He is a youthful and a first-time offender. It appears he is otherwise of good character and he has the support of his family and others in the community. He maintains steady employment and provides for his wife and child. He accepts full responsibility for his wrongdoing and has already begun to rehabilitate himself.

Taking into consideration all of these circumstances, in my view an appropriate sentence in this case is a sentence of 12 months.

Through his defence counsel, the offender seeks a conditional sentence; that is, that he be allowed to serve his sentence in this community rather than in a jail cell in Yellowknife or Hay River.

After much deliberation, I have decided that the prerequisites in section 742.1 for the granting of a conditional sentence are present in this case.

There is no statutorily prescribed minimum sentence for this crime. The sentence to be imposed is less than two years' imprisonment. Allowing this non-violent, first-time, youthful and remorseful offender to serve his sentence in

[Page 5]

the community would not endanger the community.

Would a conditional sentence be consistent with the fundamental purposes and principles and objectives of sentencing? In my view, it would be consistent with the principle in section 718.2 that actual incarceration be imposed as a sanction of last resort only when other sanctions are not available or appropriate. In my view, a conditional sentence in this particular case would not offend the principles of parity or proportionality, because I view this case as rather unique. That is, I am unaware of a case of a similar offence and similar offender with the particular circumstances here and this offender's particular degree of culpability or moral responsibility.

The Crown, not unexpectedly, expresses a concern that a conditional sentence would not be consistent with the principle of general deterrence. But the Supreme Court of Canada stated in the Proulx decision that a carefully crafted conditional sentence can, indeed, reflect denunciation and deterrence.

In my view, there will be a deterrent and denunciatory effect of a conditional sentence with strict conditions, such as a curfew or house arrest in a small community like Inuvik where the

[Page 6]

offender is well-known and where the sentence can be under the close scrutiny of a supervisor and, if necessary, the police. So although, as I say, it is not without some careful deliberation, that I have decided that in the particular circumstances, perhaps unusual circumstances of this case, and in the observations and conclusions I have drawn about the sincerity of this offender's acknowledgement of wrongdoing that I will exercise my discretion by allowing him to serve his sentence in the community of Inuvik rather than in a correctional centre in Yellowknife or Hay River.

Please stand, Mr. Hansen. Jeremy Hansen, for the crime that you have committed, it is the sentence of this Court that you serve a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment. Pursuant to section 742.1 the sentence will be served in the community pursuant to the following conditions: You will keep the peace and be of good behaviour. You will appear before this Court when required to do so. You will report to a supervisor within two working days and thereafter as required by the supervisor. You will remain within the Northwest Territories unless written perrni3sion to go outside the jurisdiction is obtained from the Court or the supervisor. You will notify the

[Page 7]

supervisor in advance of any change of name or address and promptly notify the supervisor of any change of employment or occupation.

You will perform 200 hours of community service work, 100 hours in each of the first and second six months of your sentence as directed by the supervisor, including participation in talks or counselling sessions for young persons as directed by your supervisor.

You will be subject to a curfew at your place of residence. Can I have the residence, street address, please?

MR. MacFARLANE:  33 Kingmingya, sir.

THE COURT:   33 Kingmingya, from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. every day. The only exceptions will be for medical or other emergencies for yourself or your immediate family and with the express permission of the supervisor. You will not be in possession of illegal drugs at any time and you will attend whatever counselling, therapy or rehabilitation sessions as directed by your supervisor.

There will be a victim fine surcharge of $100 to be paid within seven days.

Mr. Hansen, I am going to ask your lawyer, Mr. MacFarlane, to explain to you after court, explain to you carefully the consequences to you

[Page 8]

of any breach of any one of these conditions during the 12-month sentence, because there are serious consequences.

I want you to remain here after court until you have received a copy of the order and until the Clerk, with the assistance of Mr. MacFarlane, has explained to you in particular the provisions of section 742.4 and 742.6 of the Criminal Code.

Now, Mr. Hansen, some people will say that I have been too lenient with you for the serious crime that you have committed, but I am satisfied you have already learned from your mistake, and also that a 12-month curfew in this small town will not be easy - so don't let me down, don't let your family down again, and show your community that you have learned from your mistake. Good luck to you.


Certified to be a true and accurate transcript pursuant to Rules 723 and 724 of the Supreme Court Rules.

Jill MacDonald, CSR(A), RPR
Court Reporter

[Page 9]